A few weeks ago, we shared with you a report published by The Buckeye Institute entitled Defending Liberty in Ohio: A Roadmap for Protecting Freedom and Limiting Government with the State Constitution. The report was published in conjunction with the Institute’s creation of the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law, and was attributed solely to the 1851 Center’s newly hired director, Maurice A. Thompson.  At the time, we didn’t discuss Mr. Thompson specifically, but that was nearly 3 weeks ago and things have changed.  In a very big way.

Today, Maurice Thompson spoke at a press conference announcing the 1851 Center’s intentions to place a constitutional amendment before voters next year that would make Ohio a right-to-work state.  We discussed the absurdity of introducing such an amendment so soon after the Issue 2 defeat, but we can now confirm that they submitted the amendment language to the Ohio Attorney General on November 1, a full week before the election.  They knew Issue 2 was failing miserably and wanted to cover their bases.

While the filing of the amendment is a worrisome attempt in its brazenness to circumvent the will of Ohio’s electorate, the core beliefs of those behind the effort, Maurice Thompson and the 1851 Center, are not only appalling, they can only be described as arrogant, bigoted, prejudicial, and flat-out racist.

The 1851 Center’s founding report, Defending Liberty in Ohiowas written by Thompson and published by The Buckeye Institute in 2009 in conjunction with the election of President Barack Obama. The document explains the timing:

It’s time to even out the playing field, and to use the Ohio Constitution to benefit Ohioans in search of freedom, rather than special interests in search of favors. This is why the Buckeye Institute is establishing the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law. Through targeted and principled litigation, the 1851 Center represents a significant opportunity to improve Ohioans’ lives and well-being.

Thompson’s opening paragraphs best explain his perspective and his fears of the new president [emphasis mine]:

In the aftermath of the 2008 Presidential elections, many Americans fear that our federal courts will take a drastic turn to the left. Fortunately for Ohioans, the Ohio Constitution offers greater, independent protections of individual rights, and the Buckeye Institute’s new 1851 Center for Constitutional Law will focus on invigorating those protections. Fears of a stark shift in how federal courts protect constitutional rights may be well-founded. Our new President has expressed his constitutional jurisprudence as follows:

“[T]he judge has to then bring in his or her own perspectives, his ethics, his or her moral bearings. And in those circumstances what I do want is a judge who is sympathetic enough to those who are on the outside, those who are vulnerable, those who are powerless, those who can’t have access to political power and as a consequence can’t protect themselves from being dealt with sometimes unfairly, that the courts become a refuge for justice.”

He’s added that he prefers judges who have “got the heart, the empathy to understand what it’s like to be a young teenage mom.  The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old, and that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.”

Mr. Obama is accompanied by sizable majorities of Democrats in both the House and the Senate, and enters office at a time of record federal court vacancies. This means that Mr. Obama will not only have the authority to handpick federal judges who share his constitutional jurisprudence, but he will have the authority to do this early and often.

Quick summary: Maurice Thompson is a bigoted racist who wants to convince us that Ohioans need to be terrified that President Barack Obama might appoint judges who demonstrate:

  • sympathy to those who are vulnerable,
  • sympathy to those who are powerless,
  • sympathy to those who are can’t protect themselves from being dealt with sometimes unfairly
  • empathy towards teenage mothers,
  • empathy towards the poor,
  • empathy towards the elderly,
  • empathy towards the disabled,
  • empathy towards gays, or
  • empathy towards blacks

Two quick definitions:

  1. sympathy – the sharing of another’s emotions, esp. of sorrow or anguish; pity; compassion
  2. empathy – the intellectual identification with or vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another

Let’s piece a few of those sentences together for clarity’s sake:

The 1851 Center for Constitutional Law will focus on invigorating protections of the Ohio Constitution due to well-founded fears of a stark shift in how federal courts protect constitutional rights because our new President has expressed a preference for judges who are sympathetic to those who are vulnerable, those who are powerless, those who can’t have access to political power, and he prefers judges who have the empathy to understand what it’s like to be a young teenage mom, to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old.  Mr. Obama will have the authority to handpick federal judges who share his constitutional jurisprudence, and will do this early and often.

And Maurice Thompson and the 1851 Center are here to protect Ohioans from the devastating effect of the President’s choices.

Yes, God forbid anyone other that straight white males have some rights around here.

Remember, this report is the founding document of the 1851 Center, and was written solely by Maurice Thompson, the man who has now introduced a right-to-work amendment in Ohio.  Whatever garbage he spews from his mouth when advocating for his amendment must be colored by his clear mission to only elevate the rights of Ohioans who are:

  • protected,
  • powerful,
  • authoritative,
  • wealthy,
  • young,
  • healthy,
  • straight, and
  • white (or at least not black)

The 1851 Center & Maurice A. Thompson: vocal tea party supporters, staunch opponents of public unions, and opponents of minority populations.

This is what they believe.  This is who they are.  This is a statement about their core values and the driving values behind this latest ploy.

Finally, in case you were still unsure about Thompson’s motives, he included a crystal-clear summary in his Roadmap for Protecting Freedom:

The 1851 Center will also commit itself using the Ohio Constitution to provide a safe harbor from leftward-moving federal courts. With the Buckeye Institute, and the contributions of Ohio citizens, the 1851 Center will spur the pendulum to swing away from government intrusiveness, and back towards the ethically superior state of freedom.

We should all take a pass on Thompson’s version of safe harbor.  Who will ally themselves with such a bigoted, fringe-element organization?

Is this really who Ohioans want “protecting their rights?”

 

 

Evangelize!
  • Print
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
 
  • http://www.plunderbund.com Eric

    They probably should amend this page:

    http://www.ohioconstitution.org/legislative-victories/

    Unless “We got an amendment added to a bill that got crushed in a citizen’s referendum” is something to brag about.  ;-)

  • Anonymous

    They want to make Ohio North Alabama.

    THE SOUTH SHALL RISE AGAIN…….IN OHIO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    *chuckle*

  • Anonymous

    “When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in body fat carrying a misspelled sign”.

    Anonymous

  • Anonymous

    Agree

  • Anonymous

    Awesome diss. I was going to make an inflammatory rant but you saved me and got me to laugh.

  • Anonymous

    Then we will have the best of both worlds. Change the law and get rid of elected who don’t work for us. WIN-WIN!

    Oh yeah I forgot, people will still not vote or be misled onto voting for then radical R’s.

    Never mind.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Carrie-Preston/100000765994211 Carrie Preston

    I would like to know this too. There are a few amendments I think we need to sponsor. Recall is one.

  • Anastasjoy

    “Swing away from government intrusiveness,” eh? So Mr. Thompson, does that mean you will vehemently oppose all laws and judges that try to dictate to a woman what she can do with her body?

    Oh, yeah, that’s DIFFERENT. NOT!

  • Woltrapekim

    OHKnighty, you need to relax. We started something tuesday THEY can’t finish. The wave is growing, we just need to keep pushing.

  • Anonymous

    While slavery was illegal in Ohio:
    ARTICLE V.

    ELECTIVE FRANCHISE.

    Section 1. Every white male citizen of the United States, of
    the age of twenty one years, who shall have been a resident of the State one
    year next preceding the election, and of the county, township or ward, in which
    he resides, such time as may be provided by law, shall have the qualifications
    of an elector, and be entitled to vote at all elections.

  • Anonymous

    While slavery was illegal in Ohio:
    ARTICLE V.

    ELECTIVE FRANCHISE.

    Section 1. Every white male citizen of the United States, of
    the age of twenty one years, who shall have been a resident of the State one
    year next preceding the election, and of the county, township or ward, in which
    he resides, such time as may be provided by law, shall have the qualifications
    of an elector, and be entitled to vote at all elections.

  • Woltrapekim

    I was speaking of the south, but could have phrased it better, playing off the North Alabama comment. Excellent find on the elective franchise article. Where did you get that from?

  • Fotogirlcb2002

    They will never let us have this …..to many of them still trying to please the governor.
    Hagan and Foley couldnt ever get their one to the floor even for consideration, let alone to a committee.
    I have wondered —along others here — What does it take for the people of Ohio to do this ….  ?
    If someone wrote up a online petition and we all signed to have a re-call and presented it to Ohio Congress maybe be a start?
    Afterall  they are suppose to work for us– we elected them — we can put them out.
    If they still side with him  thats exactly what need to happen.
    We need to start sending e-mails and calling them now about “Right to Work” stuff.

    Plunder guys what do you think of a online petition to do this ????

  • Woltrapekim

    Unfortunately, valid points like these get lost in the shuffle. However, I keep them in the back of my mind when I vote.

  • Anastasjoy

    Online petitions are toothless, a mere indication of support but without legal standing. Actually Foley started an online petition for recall support probably 6-8 months ago. I imagine it’s still up. Go to his website. If you could get an organization behind it, you could do exactly what the 1851 folks are doing with right-to-work: collect the real-life signatures and get recall on the ballot as a constitutional amendment. But it takes a lot of real-life (not online) work, organization and money. Remember the Issue 3 was going nowhere for a year until the Republican Party jumped in and hired a professional company to quickly scoop up the signatures to put it on the ballot with the hopes that it would take down SB 5 repeal (how’d that work out for you, guys?)

    Personally, this is not where I would prefer to put my energy. Even if you did it and it passed next year, then you would have to start collecting signatures for recalling Kasich, followed by an election. By that time it would be 2014, and he would be leaving office anyway. And all of that would soak up tons of time and energy. If we’re going to do a constitutional amendment, I would prefer to focus on nonpartisan redistricting. That is something you could get support for from groups like the League of Women Voters and the ACLU.

  • Fotogirlcb2002

    Foley sends me an email ever so often thats how I knew they had no support about their bill—-
    I signed their on line petition — but I got snowed under w/ sb5 stuff and never knew how many signatures they collected .  I hope he doesnt run — just because hes says no doesnt mean its true — hes lied before and still lies and will continue to lie.
    Hoping these folks up for re-election next year wont lend support to anything he does.
    The re-districting ??  Prob go their way …. to many of them .

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_CPGEIS72YM42YN47UIYMSZBBYE Peter Happe

    Nobody is flooding and forcibly “integrating” black nations
    and ONLY black nations with non-blacks and calling native blacks evil racists
    for opposing their replacement. This is happening in white nations and ONLY in
    white nations. They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white. Anti-racist
    is a code word for anti-white. Its genocide.

  • TGI Fred

    Greg,
    I just wanted to let you know that my son is a very liberal college philosophy professor who will be using this post as an example of a straw man argument in his class in January.  Each student receives one op-ed/blog post/speech and they pick apart the elements that make it a straw man.  They then construct a logical proof to demonstrate that it is in fact a straw man argument.  To be fair, he did say that yours would be a little more difficult because the students will have trouble understanding the fallacy without an appreciable understanding of the concept of jurisprudence.  He said that this makes your straw man a particularly effective one in that someone who lacks this knowledge will easily accept its fallacious conclusion.  
    Good work.

  • Anonymous

    Fred,
    Thank you for sharing our site liberally.  Please be sure to have your son credit Plunderbund appropriately.
    Have a great weekend.

  • Anonymous

    And to be clear, Fred Davis, you share Mr. Thompson’s views, correct?  You also believe that we should be afraid of Barack Obama’s legal philosophy that judges should protect marginalized populations, including the elderly, blacks, and gays. That is your stance, right?

  • TGI Fred

    It’s a judicial philosophy.
    The role of the judiciary is not to protect society’s marginalized populations.
    Why do we even need a legislature, we could just have a bunch of judges!
    Please don’t tell me you’re a civics teacher.

  • Anonymous

    Philosophy of law; legal philosophy – take that argument up with Merriam-Webster.

    So yes, you agree with Thompson’s philosophy that the elderly, blacks, gays, etc., should not receive consideration of equal rights by the courts.  And you are asserting that you have the correct philosophy, not President Obama.  And you are asserting that yours is the only correct philosophy that exists.

    Thanks for clearing that up for me.  I was beginning to think you might be open-minded.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NXCMSD27V46Y6BR63PWI6VC7UY Les

    we make jokes, they make plans. funny joke, brilliantly evil plan. who will win? please don’t be surprised when it happens.

  • Mike Partlow

    Thanks!

  • RJ Walker

    Assuming everything you say about Thompson is right (and I have no reason to disagree) I do not believe that fact supports your claim that “Racist beliefs form the foundation of Ohio’s Right to work amendment.  

    I know people who are not apparently racist or who are acting out of racist motives who stupidly support the right to mooch” laws.  (“Right to work laws would be more accurately described as “right to mooch off the work and sacrifices of others” laws.)

    And, of course, no one is forced to apply for a job in union shop.  Don’t want to join a union?  Don’t apply for a job with a unionized company

    “Your choice.”

    “But I want that job!”  

    “Fine, but understand it is a union job you are choosing to apply for – you can also chose to apply for a job in anon-union shop.”

  • Anonymous

    ” What Obama wants are judicial activists that
    will do what they wish the legislature had done. ”
    Now who’s straw manning?

  • Anonymous

    Fred Davis Retail,

    You are not at a loss for opinions, but you seem to have great difficulty answering questions, so here’s an easy yes/no question for you.

    Do you believe that Thompson’s philosophy of law is correct and Obama’s philosophy of law is incorrect?

  • Anonymous

    RJ,

    Those people you know apparently never felt the need to file the amendment, while Thompson did.

  • TGI Fred

    I don’t know M. Thompson’s belief structure.  I would almost undoubtedly prefer his to Obama’s.  I think Obama’s is patently flawed.  It’s not about correct or incorrect, however, you seem to think it is.   

    Also, my name is TGI Fred (Thank God It’s Fred).

  • TGI Fred

    You apparently have no idea how a straw man argument works. 

  • Anonymous

    Fred Davis Retail,

    You keep contradicting yourself with each successive post.  You claim I am making a straw man argument, yet you state you don’t even know Thompson’s belief structure (read the document – he’s very clear), rendering your ability to make such a claim as moot.  Then you say there isn’t a correct or incorrect philosophy – except for Obama’s, of course, which you say is patently flawed (i.e., incorrect).  

    Keep posting.  You are very entertaining.

    Also, you surely know that changing your current username doesn’t change it on your past comments on this or any other cooperating site. (Fred Davis, Darth Fredder, Fred, Freddavis, FredDavis, Freddavisretail, Robert Alfonso)

  • Anonymous

    Don’t mistake what I said. Evil has ruled America for way too long. If we can’t get success at the ballot box, maybe it’s time for another war fought for the disenfranchised. I’m not suggesting violence.

    They will come back more vile, rotten, immoral than ever. It is what they do. Some people are too stupid to figure it out.

    They Evil, stupid, can’t be fixed and are unrelenting in their pursuit of money, power and evil.

    I didn’t vote for these monsters but someone did.

    They hate us and I hate them.

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!